Table of Contents

Introduction. 2

Issues during Simulation. 2

Analyses of the Everest Experience. 3

Virtual Teams and Regular Teams. 3

Leadership Effectiveness. 4

Learning Review.. 5

Conclusion. 7

References. 8

Introduction

 The complete project outline was to conduct a simulation of Everest climbing. Teams were made and others were directed to act according to the plan and program. Teams and team mates were directed by teachers and trainers, over the topic as how to commence and complete the whole “Everest Simulation” program. Both simulation programs were to conduct by the students as a team of five members, one will act as an “observer” and in exceptional cases teams will be allotted with a seventh member, who will act as an observer along with the sixth team member who also is an observer. A website was used for the purpose of assignment allocation and completing accordingly.  Everybody was in a mood to take up the challenge. So it was pre planned that just after coming from the university we will take up some snacks and get ready within 15-20 minutes, then everybody from their respective places will call one another and then we will start. We were in different places so with the internet connection we started contacting with the group members through cell phone. We took every group members view for this thing and got to make this thing feasible. Yes, I was the person who organized the team.

Issues during Simulation

Although there were teams, and they were working quite in a good way but there were some problems as, they were lack of coordination, issues with team leading, and several others. The team has done quite a good job, the thing which we will take care for the next level is that if there is any obstacle not all to go and face it rather than one should go and then analyze the root of the problem (May, 1985). If everyone faces the problem together then there is a chance that the problem might seem a little lesser in size. In the other hand if only one face it then others get a chance to observe and point out what mistake is done and they can rectify it.

During the simulation we stayed connected through Face book, we made a group of our team there and everyone who was having problem pinged there and the matter was sorted out as soon as possible. Again we all member before starting the simulation sat together and sorted this way to stay connected and give ones opinion through this means. It was really a good and positive experience, realized when in reality such situation comes how to tackle and come up with some healthy ideas to take your teammates out of danger. It felt like we were in reality to make a expedition to Mt. Everest and all of us were so excited to take up the task (May, 1985). I knew that it is going to turn out to be a massive excitement task. Issue as in the negative part from the first part of the simulation is the leading part of the complete task, and there were some part which went well as they were planned to be.

Analyses of the Everest Experience

Virtual Teams and Regular Teams

Everybody was more or less involved in the matter. Being the leader I ordered how to move and how to tackle some of the odd situations. Others also gave me a huge support by not over ruling me, but in case when I am wrong they rectified me which was good move as a team. This was a good feature which I need to mark of my group, they all have handled the situation with cold hand, without getting angry on anyone or releasing frustration on others that why they have done so why not in other way like that. None of the team member’s decision conflicted during the simulation; they were very much clear about their goal and did the task in a well composed manner. When anybody was having some problem we tried to solve that out in an interactive session through our chats in the group created by us. It helped us a lot and we are thankful for this to each and every member of our team. The emotion which I felt through the conversation in group which was created in Face book, was that they all were very much excited and all they want was to finish the task as soon as possible as if they themselves climbing Mt. Everest. They were so much full with energy to go like this way and that, to tackle the obstacle this and that way. This experience made me feel like we were still children and full of excitements and no fear for danger. The primary decision was taken by me, and if felt that it was not feasible then the vote of the team members were taken. This was very much required at this level because everything was unknown to everyone, and nobody knew what was coming next, so a collective decision was necessary from everyone, and according to that moves were chosen toward the summit. Being a team leader I was very much happy to lead a team like this, I think I haven’t tried to be arrogant and compelled others to obey my orders. It   was like an interactive session for us to make a good expedition towards Mt. Everest. The team members have supported me a lot and for this I am very much thankful to them. It was really a proud feeling and satisfactory too. Being the group leader for such a case made me felt like I really bear all the responsibilities of my team members and if anything adverse happens it’s me who needs to do the needful. Such inner deep feelings aroused inside me, and made me fulfill the task with all more energy and patience. I am not completely satisfied with my work, since during the obstacle part I made everyone to approach together and face it, whereas I myself could have went there and faced it, and then knowing the root of the difficulty  could have told others to face it. For which much of the task time was wasted. And it could have been done more nicely and flawlessly.

Leadership Effectiveness

 I think because of the above reason only my team was not being able to finish the task a little faster, as all of we went together for the obstacle then much of the time was hampered. We could have saved a much more time and completed the task a bit earlier. No matter what is the situation we had enough believe that we can make it, and there is where we were successful. We would try to be more composed, do not panic during crucial time. Before we make any decision it’s very essential to make everyone realize the essence of it. Not to face the trouble together it’s not a war so we need to be more patient and observe things much closely and need quick constructive ideas to face the difficulty. Yes, team contract was used for the complete procedure as there was a section for personal information and details, which eventually will help for completing the procedure in a healthier way. The complete procedure was a simulation process for the purpose of completing an Everest summit program. A simulation program is a computerized program projecting a real world. A simulation process helps identifying a scope for popularizing the complete project in a real world situation. Simulation of the complete Everest summit program is a computerized virtual world, where teams were trained to perform according to the information they have been trained with. Writing the contract has always been helpful throughout the simulation process, having a contract overhead throughout the complete project has been driving team mates to do their part sincerely and with dedication. Teams were almost the same and there were not much changes then the fist team. The team was dedicated enough and decided to not to make any changes. The team and members was concentrated enough to make achieve their goals and objectives until the completion of the entire simulation project. The project outcome and other procedure were completely satisfactory and team mates were satisfied with the complete process. There was a plan first the team came up with and the complete project was to run according to that plan. Everything went perfectly well and there were no problem with the complete procedure. The planning went right as that was in Everest 1. The organization process was perfect, although a little problem was there with the procedure at first.

The same person did organize the Everest 2 simulation, who did organize the 1^st Everest assignment. The reason behind the same person being the organizer is because the management abilities of that person (Danielson, 1983). The over-viewing abilities helped him a lot to organize a successful simulation procedure. The simulation did help students a lot to understand the complete process and then understand the importance of the project. If compared from the Everest 1 simulation program, there were some differences that can be observed in the team performances. The teams were more dedicated in the Everest 2 simulation program. Because, the team mates have already witnessed and had an hand in hand experience from the Everest 1 simulation, they were a lot confident about the work procedure and how they are to perform in the simulation program, and what role they are to serve within the complete simulation program. From one point of view of an “Observer”, it is advantageous because the team and team mates are aware of one thing; that is there is an observer and he/she is watching overhead to rectify the complete process if needed and this procedure has been helpful. And if you are not an observer it is another sort of experience to lead the team and make it work the complete procedure.

It is a positive experience, because there are a lot of things one might encounter with in the complete procedure.

Learning Review

This question is a little difficult to answer since; we have been prepared to do a simulation of the entire procedure. A simulation is a virtual world projecting the same and exact object, producing result based on a real world time (Danielson, 1983). Simulating the complete project, was an wonderful experience since we were to perform in a team, pretending we actually are climbing on Everest, we were entitled to conduct a rescue operation throughout the procedure just the way it happens in a real world. The procedure was just the way it was in the first simulation process. Team mates were entitled with unique names and they were to call themselves during the simulation process. The complete communication process during the Everest 2 simulation process was the same way it was in the Everest 1 simulation. Whether it is round 1 or 2, whatever position did any of the team members did hold they were to pay even attention and act as important as anyone. Team member were equally engaged and were paying equal attention to every step as managed in the complete simulation program. The complete simulation program was planned and programmed as to perform the complete operation as a team. But, if the question comes to, if there were any conflict during the procedure, the answer would be “no”, there were not much conflict, there were everything planned and projected prior to the final simulation process (Emerson, 1982). So it helped a lot to perform the complete simulation program without any conflict during the complete simulation procedure. The complete aim and objective was planned and discussed well before the final program, with one and only aim to reduce and avoid any conflict. The complete process was a virtual one and no real situation was actually there. Although, everything was computerized, and everyone has to perform according to the planned and pre projected way, so there has not been much emotions observed throughout the simulation process. Although, observer seem to get a little frustrated while we were at the middle of the program, because he had to look over head and observe every team member and prepare a report for the same. Because, he had to manage the complete process and observe the complete project and team member and their performance individually. After the 1^st simulation process, we should have changed the complete procedure for the entire project. But since we did not change the procedure, the effectiveness was not much effective, since the 1^st simulation process. Decisions were made random during the entire process of simulation. Since it was out 2^nd experience, we should have changed our work criteria and hence we did not, it did not really work well. Satisfaction depends upon the quality of the entire output. Since, the output was not really up to the mark. And this happened only because of the leadership style. We should have changed, since it did not work well in the 1^st simulation process. So, it was not a satisfactory one. Emotions were observed in the observer, since he had to observe and make a journal about the same, it was a little difficult for him to observe every team member, analyze and make a journal at the same time. Since the leadership was not really a successful one and the output was not a fruitful one, how can one say the team was successful? If the aim and objective of achieving higher points and scoring better than other team was achieved then, it would have been justified if said that the team is successful one.

Conclusion

The complete report is the just the mirrored reflection of the report made above. Working in teams, and with a lot of advantage and some limitations and good and bad point has helped me learn a lot new and innovative ideas about how to deal with certain situation. Situation about, what to do, when a team member is hurt and he needs to get out of the simulation project and then how to recover the blank space of that team member, and many other dealing tactics. With the aim and objective the team was build, the expectations were too high and since the team did not perform well, the team combination is not proved to be good enough to work together. The project information were shared over the “Face book” group page and Christina booked study room, team was a leader guided one, trained to perform in a team, but the leadership was not good enough to do the justification (Majumdar, 2011). Further information was shared with the help of projecting them over a white board, before the simulation process and during the process as well, with a common aim to achieve a group target, so that a higher point can be achieved. Throughout the complete process there were no conflict, because the tasks were well planned and the team mates were trained enough to work together and perform accordingly.

References

Clark, D. and May, W. (1985). HVACSIM+ building systems and equipment simulation program. 1st ed. Gaithersburg, MD: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, National Bureau of Standards.

Clark, D. and May, W. (1985). HVACSIM+ building systems and equipment simulation program. 1st ed. Gaithersburg, MD: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, National Bureau of Standards.

Emerson, D. (1982). An introduction to the TSAR simulation program. 1st ed. Santa Monica, CA: Rand.

Emerson, D. (1982). An introduction to the TSAR simulation program. 1st ed. Santa Monica, CA: Rand.

Emerson, D. (1982). An introduction to the TSAR simulation program. 1st ed. Santa Monica, CA: Rand.

Giese, P. and Danielson, J. (1983). CROMAX. 1st ed. [Madison, Wis.?]: U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory.

Giese, P. and Danielson, J. (1983). CROMAX. 1st ed. [Madison, Wis.?]: U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory.

Majumdar, A. (2011). Generalized fluid system simulation program, version 5.0–educational. 1st ed. Huntsville, Ala.: National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Marshall Space Flight Center.

Majumdar, A. (2011). Generalized fluid system simulation program, version 5.0–educational. 1st ed. Huntsville, Ala.: National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Marshall Space Flight Center.

Montgomery, V. and Meyer, J. (1993). Edwards Aquifer ground-water protection program, Central Texas Region. 1st ed. Austin, Tex.: Texas Water Commission.

Neervoort, F. (1976). Management report. 1st ed. Jerusalem: Ministry of Commerce & Industry.

Penderghast, T. (1988). Entrepreneurial simulation program. 1st ed. San Diego [etc.]: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

Penderghast, T. (1988). Entrepreneurial simulation program. 1st ed. San Diego [etc.]: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.